Bill

BILL • US HOUSE

HR 7764

National Threat Evaluation and Reporting Program Reassignment and Funding Reform Act of 2026

119th Congress

NTER would move from DHS I&A to OSLLE and be funded from non-NIP sources, preserving SLTT engagement and requiring regular congressionally reported progress.

Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
0
0
Bill Summary · HR 7764

Overview

HR 7764, the National Threat Evaluation and Reporting Program Reassignment and Funding Reform Act of 2026, would transfer the Department of Homeland Security’s National Threat Evaluation and Reporting (NTER) Program from the Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) to the Office for State and Local Law Enforcement (OSLLE). The bill seeks to realign funding away from the National Intelligence Program (NIP) and establish non-intelligence funding sources for NTER, while ensuring continuity of operations and ongoing engagement with state, local, Tribal, and territorial partners.

Main purpose and intent

  • Reassign the NTER Program from I&A to OSLLE within DHS.
  • Correct funding alignment by removing NTER from NIP appropriations and identifying alternative, non-NIP funding sources to support ongoing operations and expansion under OSLLE.
  • Maintain SLTT (state, local, Tribal, and territorial) engagement and program continuity during the transition.
  • Improve accountability and reporting on the transfer, funding adjustments, and program impact.

Key provisions and changes

  • Transfer of NTER (Section 3(a)):

    • The Secretary of Homeland Security must transfer the NTER Program to OSLLE within 180 days after enactment.
    • The transfer must preserve mission continuity and maintain engagement with SLTT partners during the transition.
    • The Secretary must move personnel, assets, equipment, records, and unexpended balances necessary to operate NTER, ensuring no reduction in capabilities or services for SLTT partners.
  • Funding and budgeting (Section 3(b)):

    • Funds from the National Intelligence Program cannot be obligated or expended for NTER after the transfer.
    • DHS must identify and allocate alternative, non-NIP funding sources to support NTER under OSLLE. Potential sources include DHS state and local programs appropriations, preparedness grants, or other relevant nonintelligence funding streams.
  • Reporting requirements (Section 3(c)):

    • The Secretary must provide semi-annual progress reports to Congress on transfer progress, impacts on NTER operations and SLTT engagement, funding adjustments, and any implementation challenges, for two years following enactment.
  • Definitions (Section 3(d)):

    • Clarifies terms: I&A (DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis), NIP (National Intelligence Program), NTER (National Threat Evaluation and Reporting Program), and OSLLE (Office for State and Local Law Enforcement).

Who is affected

  • National security and DHS program management:
    • NTER would shift administrative ownership from I&A to OSLLE.
  • State, local, Tribal, and territorial partners:
    • Potentially enhanced coordination with DHS’s state and local law enforcement-focused office.
  • DHS budgeting and funding processes:
    • Removal of NTER from NIP funding; establishment of alternative non-NIP funding streams for ongoing operations and expansion.
  • Congress:
    • Ongoing reporting requirements on transfer progress, funding changes, and program impacts.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Enactment timeline:
    • If enacted, transfer to occur within 180 days after enactment.
  • Transition governance:
    • Ensure continuity of operations and sustained SLTT engagement during the transition period.
  • Reporting cadence:
    • Initial report due within 120 days of enactment.
    • Then every 180 days for two years, covering progress, impact, funding, challenges, and recommendations.

Potential impact and considerations

  • Program focus and alignment:
    • Positioning NTER within OS LLE could strengthen SLTT partnerships and on-the-ground threat assessment and reporting capabilities.
  • Funding flexibility:
    • Shifting away from NIP may potentially provide more nimble or locally focused funding avenues, but could require careful coordination to ensure stable long-term support.
  • Oversight and accountability:
    • Regular congressional reporting would enhance transparency about transition progress and program effectiveness.

Note: This summary reflects the text and provisions as introduced and does not account for amendments that may be adopted during the legislative process.

Hi! I'm your AI assistant for HR 7764. I can help you understand its provisions, impacts, and answer any questions.

Key Provisions Impacts Timeline
Sign in to chat

Start the Conversation

Be the first to share your thoughts on this petition. Your voice matters!

Share your opinion above